14 research outputs found
Introducing a sector-wide pooled fund in a fragile context: Mixed-methods evaluation of the health transition fund in Zimbabwe
No full textIntroduction Aid effectiveness and improving its impact is a central policy matter for donors and international organisations. Pooled funding is a mechanism, whereby donors provide financial contributions towards a common set of broad objectives by channelling finance through one instrument. The results of pooled funds as an aid mechanism are mixed, and there is limited data on both methodology for, and results of, assessment of effectiveness of pooled funding. Methods This study adapted a conceptual framework incorporating the Paris Principles of Aid Effectiveness and qualitative methods to assess the performance of the Health Transition Fund (HTF) Zimbabwe. 30 key informant interviews, and 20 focus group discussions were conducted with informants drawn from village to national level. Descriptive secondary data analysis of Demographic Health Surveys, Health Management Information Systems (HMIS) and policy reports complemented the study. Results The HTF combined the most optimal option to channel external aid to the health sector in Zimbabwe during a period of socioeconomic and political crisis. It produced results quickly and at scale and enhanced coordination and ownership at the national and subnational level. Flexibility in using the funds was a strong feature of the HTF. However, the initiative compromised on the investment in local capacity and systems, since the primary focus was on restoring essential services within a nearly collapsed healthcare system, rather than building long-term capacity. Significant changes in maternal and newborn health outcomes were observed during the HTF implementation in Zimbabwe. Conclusion A framework which can be used to assess pooled funds was adapted and applied. Future assessments could use this or another framework to provide new evidence regarding effectiveness of pool donor funds although the frameworks should be properly tested and adapted in different contexts
Safety Profile of PrePex Male Circumcision Device and Client Satisfaction With Adolescent Males Aged 13–17 Years in Zimbabwe
No full textA Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Safety, Procedure Time, and Cost of the PrePex™ Device to Forceps Guided Surgical Circumcision in Zimbabwe.
No full textBackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS promote MC (male circumcision) as a key HIV prevention strategy where HIV prevalence and incidence are high and MC prevalence is low. In Zimbabwe, to achieve the 1.26 million circumcisions needed to be performed by 2015 to achieve optimal MC coverage, a new approach was needed. The primary objective of the current trial was to assess the performance (safety, procedure time, and cost) of the PrePex device compared to forceps-guided surgical circumcision.Methods and findingsThis Phase II, randomized, open-label trial in Zimbabwe involved healthy, non-circumcised adult male volunteers who were randomly assigned to the PrePex device (n = 160) or surgical arm (n = 80). Three doctors and 4 nurses, all certified on both circumcision methods, performed the procedures. The PrePex device procedure involves a plastic ring with a rubber O-ring that necrotizes the foreskin to facilitate easy and minimally invasive removal. Total procedure time was the primary endpoint. Adverse event (AE) data were also gathered for 90 days post-procedure. All 80 participants in the surgical arm and 158 participants in the PrePex arm achieved complete circumcision. The total procedure time for the PrePex device was approximately one-third of the total surgical procedure (4.8 minutes, Standard Deviation [SD]: 1.2 versus 14.6 minutes; SD: 4.2; pConclusionsThe trial supports previous studies' conclusions that the PrePex procedure is safe, quick, easy to apply, and effective in terms of procedure time as an alternative to traditional surgical circumcision. The PrePex device has great potential for use in overburdened health systems and in resource-limited settings and is recommended for use in rapid scale-up of adult MC in Zimbabwe.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01956370
Total procedure time (in minutes) for participants in surgical and PrePex device arms.
No full textTotal procedure time (in minutes) for participants in surgical and PrePex device arms.</p
Male circumcision unit cost components for PrePex device and surgical circumcisions for Phase II.
No full textMale circumcision unit cost components for PrePex device and surgical circumcisions for Phase II.</p
Safety and efficacy of the PrePex device in HIV-positive men: A single-arm study in Zimbabwe.
No full textMethodsWe aimed to determine if the adverse event (AE) rate was non-inferior to an AE rate of 2%, a rate considered the global standard of MC safety. Study procedures, AE definitions, and study staff were unchanged from previous PrePex Zimbabwe trials. After PrePex placement and removal, weekly visits assessed wound healing. Men returned on Day 90. Safety was defined as occurrence of moderate and serious clinical AEs. Efficacy was defined as ability to reach the endpoint of complete circumcision.ResultsAmong 400 healthy, HIV-positive, consenting adults, median age was 40 years (IQR: 34, 46); 79.5% in WHO stage 2; median CD4 was 336.5c/μl (IQR: 232, 459); 337 (85%) on anti-retroviral therapy. Among 385 (96%) observed completely healed, median days to complete healing was 42 (IQR: 35-49). There was no association between time to healing and CD4 (p = 0.66). Four study-related severe AEs and no moderate AEs were reported: severe/moderate AE rate of 1.0% (95% CI: 0.27% to 2.5). This was non-inferior to 2% AEs (p = 0.0003). All AEs were device displacements resulting in surgical MC and, subsequently, complete healing.ConclusionMale circumcision among healthy, HIV-positive men using PrePex is safe and effective. Reducing the barrier of HIV testing while improving counseling for safer sex practices among all MC clients could increase MC uptake and avert more HIV infections
Description of visits for participants in both surgical and PrePex device arms.
No full textDescription of visits for participants in both surgical and PrePex device arms.</p
Summary of VAS<sup>a</sup> pain level at various points in time.
No full textNumber and percentages of participants experiencing a given pain level (0, 2, 4, 6, 8).</p
Implementation and Operational Research: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial of AccuCirc Device Versus Mogen Clamp for Early Infant Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe.
No full textBACKGROUND: Early infant male circumcision (EIMC) is a potential key HIV prevention intervention, providing it can be safely and efficiently implemented in sub-Saharan Africa. Here, we present results of a randomized noninferiority trial of EIMC comparing the AccuCirc device with Mogen clamp in Zimbabwe. METHODS: Between January and June 2013, eligible infants were randomized to EIMC through either AccuCirc or Mogen clamp conducted by a doctor, using a 2:1 allocation ratio. Participants were followed for 14 days post-EIMC. Primary outcomes for the trial were EIMC safety and acceptability. RESULTS: One hundred fifty male infants were enrolled in the trial and circumcised between 6 and 54 days postpartum (n = 100 AccuCirc; n = 50 Mogen clamp). Twenty-six infants (17%) were born to HIV-infected mothers. We observed 2 moderate adverse events (AEs) [2%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2 to 7.0] in the AccuCirc arm and none (95% CI: 0.0 to 7.1) in the Mogen clamp arm. The cumulative incident risk of AEs was 2.0% higher in the AccuCirc arm compared with the Mogen Clamp arm (95% CI: -0.7 to 4.7). As the 95% CI excludes the predefined noninferiority margin of 6%, the result provides evidence of noninferiority of AccuCirc compared with the Mogen clamp. Nearly all mothers (99.5%) reported great satisfaction with the outcome. All mothers, regardless of arm said they would recommend EIMC to other parents, and would circumcise their next son. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized trial of AccuCirc versus Mogen clamp for EIMC demonstrated that EIMC using these devices is safe and acceptable to parents. There was no difference in the rate of AEs by device
Flow chart summarizing the screening and enrollment of the male participant candidates.
No full textFlow chart summarizing the screening and enrollment of the male participant candidates.</p
